I just don't understand how he woke up one day and believed Terrell Owens is faster than Randy Moss in their prime, and that the only present or former players capable of beating TO in 100 meters were Olympians Bob Hayes or Willie Gault.

Would you stop repping Superstars competitions like they're the U.S. Olympics track and field trials??

Oh yes, let's not talk about actual races, and instead "rep" hand-held 40 times at universities that are notorious for making outrageous claims about what players run in the 40.

Randy Moss never ran a 4.25 for scouts. The 4.25 time comes from the same coaching university that claims Michael Jennings, the guy Owens smoked in a 40 yard race, ran 4.19-4.21 (per Owens, that's what Jennings told him he runs).

Quote:

Darrell Green beat Carl Lewis in college in the 100m. Darrell Green's fastest time in the 100m is 10.08. Herschel Walker can run in a million made for TV events, he's NOT faster than Darrell Green.

So let me get this straight.

You diss a "made for TV event," but then try to claim that Green beating Lewis WHERE?...is what we should lend credence to?

Are you for real?

By the way, Lewis says it never happened. "Darrell, stop telling the world. You did not beat me."

Quote:

You do know people question the actual length the competitors run in those Superstars competitions? You can' take those times and compare them to athletes who run in more controlled environments.

Like who? An idiotic Youtube comment writer who can't figure out that the time is what is wrong, not the distance?

Quote:

Who did Owens beat in the Superstars competitions who was really fast?? No one.

Michael Westbrook.

Quote:

Randy Moss was timed at FSU in 4.25, a school with a rep for putting out accurate times on its players. Bobby Bowden said that was the fastest 40 ever run at FSU, second only to Deion Sanders' 4.23.

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

You can not be serious.

Florida State is notorious for giving bogus times. Florida State claimed Jamal Reynolds ran 4.4. They claimed Michael Jennings ran 4.19-4.21. They are the reason for the bogus speed legend regarding Deion. They put out some absurd time for Peter Boulware. They had Laveranues Coles in the 4.1s. Peter Warrick...

Here's all you need to know: When Moss was in a speed contest at Florida State, he came in second. He wasn't even the fastest player at Florida State.

Quote:

At Marshall, Randy Moss dicked around with the track team and qualified for the NCAAs in the 200 meter running a 21.15 and he set the Marshall record in the 55m running a 6.32.
Marshall's track coach Jeff Small said Moss easily could have been a world class sprinter and called him the best pure runner he'd ever seen.

And Michael Jennings ran 21.01 in the 200 meters. Owens beat him in a race. By a lot.

Quote:

TO doesn't have that kind of speed. He never did. But he was still fast, a burner in pads. But Moss is on a different level.

So yeah, Randy Moss was significantly faster than TO in or out of pads.

Restating something false doesn't make it true. There is no evidence whatsoever Moss was ever faster than Owens.

There are probably some no name practice squad players past, present, and future in their prime that could have beat Terrell Owens in a foot race. It doesn't really matter though because there is more to football than straight line speed.

THis isn't what people mean by 'game speed'. Game speed means football isn't played in a straight line. Football speed is about stops/starts, sidesteps, jumps and spins, cutbacks and about how quickly you can hit a top gear in the least amount of steps. The football field is only 100 yards long so most significant runs are about initial quickness and explosion.

It's why guys who are more quick than fast routinely make plays against players who are significantly faster running the 40.

Moss had better TIMED speed and GAME speed than TO, and nearly every other player who wore pads in the NFL.

No, that's what the clueless internet football fans think it means.

Football is not about dainty little moves and precise routes. As I mentioned earlier, the vast majority of the top receivers in football, now, and in history, were not great route runners. The Isaac Bruce's of the world are exceedingly rare.

When you see a player with a slower 40 time out-running a player with a faster 40 time on the field, it's because the player with the slower 40 time has a faster top gear that doesn't get the chance to compensate in a straight 40 yard run. If they both started running at the same time from the same starting position, the guy with the faster 40 would win every time on the field. But in football, that usually doesn't happen.

So a guy who runs 2.6 in the first 20 but 1.9 on the back 20 can pull away from someone who does 2.4 in the first 20 but 2.0 on the back 20 if he accelerates before the faster 40-time guy can react. It's that simple.

There is no way to prove anything unless we could go back in time and line up both players circa 2000 and have them perform a foot race in controlled conditions. Can't do that though so the point is moot and the case is essentially speculation one way or the other.

THe only times that are relevant from FSU are the ones before spring and fall practices and pro days.
Do guys boast about official times they never ran?? Sure.

Like Michael Jennings who NEVER played football at FSU, therefore probably never had a timed 40 other than his pro day. Bowden and the FSU coaching staff never timed him

You do realize that more players than just Coles/Reynolds/Boulware/Sanders played for FSU?? Among coaches and scouts, FSU has a rep for putting out clean times for their players. Rarely do they have guys timed at 4.40 on campus who run 4.58 at the combine, for instance.
BTW Peter Warrick never was timed in the 40 at FSU.

What's suspect about Deion's 40 time?? He ran a 4.23 at FSU, a 4.25 at the combine. What's bogus??? you don't think he was that fast either??

Okay Owens beat Michael Jennings is a race in practice overseas for an exhibition game. Great. But quit saying it was 'by a lot'. Whatever that means.

Look, you can believe TO wasn't a physical WR, someone who didn't break multiple tackles on slant routes, etc. You can believe Randy Moss was the most complete WR in his prime, although no one I know ever saw this player.

You can even believe TO has world class sprinter's speed because he beat a guy who used to run track for FSU.
But you still haven't made a convincing argument that TO is faster than Moss.
I just don't know where you even get that.
At Moss' pro day at Marshall, he ran a 4.25 according to nearly every NFL scout who was there.

You really think TO had that kind of timed speed?? For real?

And what's a speed contest?? Randy Moss ran the fastest 40 time when he was at FSU that spring, 2nd alltime only to Deion. He didn't race in a 'speed contest' and come in second.

You know, TO claims to have run an electronically timed 40 in 4.19 at a speed camp in Berkley, CA, into the wind, in 2002.

This is all according to TO, and not confirmed by ANYONE.
The difference is Randy Moss' 4.25 at Marshall was seen by NFL scouts from almost every team in the league.

Honestly, I don't know how fast TO was at his peak because it's widely accepted he got faster as a pro through intense offseason training.
Still, I don't believe he was faster than Randy Moss.

Winning a race at Superstars competition or beating Michael Jennings after practice in the 40 doesn't really prove TO is faster than Moss.

Do you think NFL coaches and scouts agree with your opinion that TO was faster than Moss, or are they suckers who are buying into the hype too?

Football is not about dainty little moves and precise routes. As I mentioned earlier, the vast majority of the top receivers in football, now, and in history, were not great route runners. The Isaac Bruce's of the world are exceedingly rare.

When you see a player with a slower 40 time out-running a player with a faster 40 time on the field, it's because the player with the slower 40 time has a faster top gear that doesn't get the chance to compensate in a straight 40 yard run. If they both started running at the same time from the same starting position, the guy with the faster 40 would win every time on the field. But in football, that usually doesn't happen.

So a guy who runs 2.6 in the first 20 but 1.9 on the back 20 can pull away from someone who does 2.4 in the first 20 but 2.0 on the back 20 if he accelerates before the faster 40-time guy can react. It's that simple.

I'm talking about a player's ability to effectively run through trash on a football field, cut, plant and go. Not route running. You're still talking about players running in straight lines, when in reality catching a ballcarrier on a football field is all about taking the right pursuit angles to the play.

Very few football plays are about the kind of acceleration you're talking about, which is linear.
If you can't move fast laterally in football, or move fast straight ahead, stop, turn the other way and hit near top gear in about four to five steps, all that timed 40 speed isn't going to show up.

That's why guys with short area quickness but lacking long speed can dominate players with elite 40 times.

I don't think you have a clear grasp about what football speed, actually how fast a player can get from point A to point B when the ball is snapped, is all about.

You gave a bunch of plays where TO ran down or blocked for guys who were slower than him. TO was fast and those plays support that, but they in no way prove he was nearly as fast as Moss. Show me something real.

THe only times that are relevant from FSU are the ones before spring and fall practices and pro days.
Do guys boast about official times they never ran?? Sure.

Like Michael Jennings who NEVER played football at FSU, therefore probably never had a timed 40 other than his pro day. Bowden and the FSU coaching staff never timed him

You do realize that more players than just Coles/Reynolds/Boulware/Sanders played for FSU?? Among coaches and scouts, FSU has a rep for putting out clean times for their players. Rarely do they have guys timed at 4.40 on campus who run 4.58 at the combine, for instance.
BTW Peter Warrick never was timed in the 40 at FSU.

Who cares if more players than them played at FSU? These are just examples of them doing their usual BS.

They had Coles at 4.19. Did Coles run a 4.19 coming out? No. Not even close.

Virginia Tech said the same garbage about DeAngelo Hall.

Typically, universities have guys at least a tenth of a second faster in the 40 than they really are. 4.35 is probably a better guess for Moss's 40 time.

Quote:

What's suspect about Deion's 40 time?? He ran a 4.23 at FSU, a 4.25 at the combine. What's bogus??? you don't think he was that fast either??

People throw around all sorts of different BS "combine times" for Deion. What he actually ran depends on what scout you ask.

Deion most certainly did not run a legitimate sub-4.2, which is what Florida State claimed.

Deion's speed was incredibly overrated. He wasn't even one of the ten fastest players of his own era. Flipper Anderson was faster than Deion on the field, and he was faster in the 100 at the Superstars competition (albeit the race was close). You never hear about Flipper Anderson's speed in those "Top 10 Fastest NFL Players Of All Time" lists.

Deion's an example of a freakishly good athlete who developed certain mythical legends as a result of the hype that dated back to high school. It was the same with Bo Jackson. There are tons of people completely convinced he ran a 4.12.

Quote:

Okay Owens beat Michael Jennings is a race in practice overseas for an exhibition game. Great. But quit saying it was 'by a lot'. Whatever that means.

It means that Owens's win was decisive. That was the word from those who were there. I've heard it was by 3-4 yards, but then the source for that was Skip Bayless, so I take that particular fact with a grain of salt. Nonetheless, all the articles that came out noted that it wasn't a close race.

Quote:

Look, you can believe TO wasn't a physical WR, someone who didn't break multiple tackles on slant routes, etc. You can believe Randy Moss was the most complete WR in his prime, although no one I know ever saw this player.

You can even believe TO has world class sprinter's speed because he beat a guy who used to run track for FSU.
But you still haven't made a convincing argument that TO is faster than Moss.
I just don't know where you even get that.At Moss' pro day at Marshall, he ran a 4.25 according to nearly every NFL scout who was there.

Source?

Just searching through google news archives, I see a mention of "4.31."

Early in the fall of 1995, during an impromptu late-night footrace among the Seminoles' fastest players, Moss came in second.

Quote:

You know, TO claims to have run an electronically timed 40 in 4.19 at a speed camp in Berkley, CA, into the wind, in 2002.

This is all according to TO, and not confirmed by ANYONE.
The difference is Randy Moss' 4.25 at Marshall was seen by NFL scouts from almost every team in the league.

There is no 4.25 at Marshall. The "4.25" was being talked about in 1997, before he'd ever even had a pro day.

If Owens ever claimed to run an electronic 4.19, that's obviously BS too. These guys all talk out their ass when it comes to 40 times. The study done on Ben Johnson's roided 100 meter world record (pre-Usain Bolt record, obviously) put his 40 time ~4.1. If you hear about a guy doing anything under 4.2, you know it's BS, and if you hear about a 4.2 anything, you should be extremely skeptical. Players have never been more prepared to run the 40 than in the last few years, and even today, anything sub-4.3 is extremely rare.

Quote:

Honestly, I don't know how fast TO was at his peak because it's widely accepted he got faster as a pro through intense offseason training.
Still, I don't believe he was faster than Randy Moss.

Winning a race at Superstars competition or beating Michael Jennings after practice in the 40 doesn't really prove TO is faster than Moss.

Do you think NFL coaches and scouts agree with your opinion that TO was faster than Moss, or are they suckers who are buying into the hype too?

Most NFL scouts would disagree, but that's because they'd be going off vague consensus. The ones more familiar with the two players would have more interesting tidbits. I've seen one scout quoted as saying, "if Owens and Moss raced in the 40, Moss would win nearly every time. But if they raced in the 100, it would be a dead heat."

I'm talking about a player's ability to effectively run through trash on a football field, cut, plant and go. Not route running. You're still talking about players running in straight lines, when in reality catching a ballcarrier on a football field is all about taking the right pursuit angles to the play.

Very few football plays are about the kind of acceleration you're talking about, which is linear.
If you can't move fast laterally in football, or move fast straight ahead, stop, turn the other way and hit near top gear in about four to five steps, all that timed 40 speed isn't going to show up.

That's why guys with short area quickness but lacking long speed can dominate players with elite 40 times.

I don't think you have a clear grasp about what football speed, actually how fast a player can get from point A to point B when the ball is snapped, is all about.

Even with what you're talking about, that doesn't make the "short area" guys faster than the guys they're "dominating" on the field. Quickness is not the same as speed. Speed is easy to define - it's how fast someone covers ground in a straight line.

At 1:14, Moss catches a quick hitch and then accelerates up field. Kevin Mathis, #23, has to turn around and start running to chase after Moss. This gives Moss a good 2, 3, 4 stride head start on Mathis. Now, in this case, Moss really is faster than the guy chasing him in the 40...but this is an example of how a player who is slower in the 40 could out-run someone faster than him. Because while Moss is out in front on strides 5, 6, 7, and 8, Mathis is still on stride 1, 2, 3, and 4. 5-6-7-8 for a "slower" player would still almost invariably be faster than 1-2-3-4 for the "faster" player.

And if the "slower" player is only slower over 40 yards because he doesn't do well in the first 20, but does better than most in the back 20, once he clears those first 20, if he's still ahead, he will pull away from most.

So if the "slower" player has a head start, he will continue to build a lead early while the "faster" player is still accelerating, and by the time he has accelerated, it's too late, as the "slower" player is now near his top speed, where he is legitimately faster than the "faster" player.

Anyway, to get back on topic - I want to know who these receivers are that people think were more complete than Moss.

Hines Ward and Reggie Wayne aren't/weren't deep threats.

Steve Smith isn't a red zone threat.

Rod Smith was slow, and a system guy.

I think Jimmy Smith was underrated, but he didn't impact games like Moss.

Randy Moss once caught 106 passes in a season and averaged 12.7 yards/catch in doing it. For anyone else, people would be thinking, "this guy seems like a possession receiver." For Randy Moss, it's as if that season never happened.

Or I'm confused on the premise of this thread. Is it saying that Moss at his prime was the most complete WR ever or he was the most complete compared against his peers in the years of his prime? All time or just during his prime year?

You can call Moss a 1 trick pony with his deep ability, but that 1 trick is better than everyone else but Rice.

Or I'm confused on the premise of this thread. Is it saying that Moss at his prime was the most complete WR ever or he was the most complete compared against his peers in the years of his prime? All time or just during his prime year?

You can call Moss a 1 trick pony with his deep ability, but that 1 trick is better than everyone else but Rice.

I believe OP was saying Randy Moss most complete WR of ALL TIME.

__________________Sig by the King BK

Fear the Spear - Winston Era has begun....

Quote:

"I wasn't going to lose to Miami, no matter what," Freeman said. "It means a lot to go out there and beat them. Every time I get a chance, I want to destroy them."

Or I'm confused on the premise of this thread. Is it saying that Moss at his prime was the most complete WR ever or he was the most complete compared against his peers in the years of his prime? All time or just during his prime year?

You can call Moss a 1 trick pony with his deep ability, but that 1 trick is better than everyone else but Rice.

I meant of his era.

The Moss vs. Rice debate is kind of tricky. I go back and forth on it.